All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

Navigation

use Perl Log In

domm (4030)

domm (email not shown publicly)http://domm.plix.at/Just in case you like to know, I'm currently full-time father of 2 kids, half-time Perl hacker, sort-of DJ, bicyclist, no longer dreadlocked and 33 years old

New CPANTS site!

While things look mostly the same on the surface a lot has changed beneath,
and even more will change. I'm now using DBIx::Class as a ORM (and still using
Catalyst), Module::CPANTS::Analyse and the still unreleased
Module::CPANTS::ProcessCPAN, which is build to allow incremental testing (i.e.
test only the dists released since the last run).

It will still take a bit of work to get the incremental testing ready. E.g.
I want to save some condensed stats of old results so that I can plot the
kwalitee evolution of dists during time.

Another open issue (and I'll appreciate any ideas) is how to handle the
ranking of authors in the cpants game. Currently it's based on average
kwalitee. I would like to include the number of dists into the rank, because
it's harder to get high kwalitee if you have lot of dists. Any ideas?

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to
use the classic discussion system instead. If you login, you can remember this preference.

There once was a metric called 'no_bad_permissons' which checked if the dists only contains files writeable by the user. Because I hate it if after doing a manual install I end up with a dir I cannot remove (without doing 'sudo rm -r dir').
The metric was dumped as several people objected. The metadata remains...

I notice that the metrics quantity is the same... Any word on if or when we might expect some of the newer proposals on the QA list to be added?Also, I think it will be interesting to see how you could deal with module quantity in the game, especially when you look at me/miyagawa/audrey and 100+ modules. You could easily end up throwing the numbers off dramatically.

If a fixed amount, it means you need to only give something like 0.01 or 0.02 points per distribution, which doesn't really seem like very much.

but Module::CPANTS::Analyse is then a link to Module::CPANTS::Generator on search.cpan.org.

From memory previous versions gave details (somehow) on the exact causes of errors, for example in earlier versions of Imager I could see it list lib/Imager/Cookbook.pm as not having use strict. Unfortunately I don't remember exactly where that was linked from - is the detailed scan information available